"Thousands" of min-wage McDonalds workers to walk off jobs to demand better pay

[BoberFett]

A new study? Let's see this study. Why doesn't the article link to it? All this kid has done is look at labor as a percentage of revenue, and said they'd have to raise prices 17% to double the 17% they spend now on labor. That's not a study. That's basic math. Barely. At least there should be references to his source material. How does he know labor is 17%? Is that corporate labor only? Or does it include franchisees? HuffPo is making a claim, calling it science, and not backing it up.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

A new study? Let's see this study. Why doesn't the article link to it? All this kid has done is look at labor as a percentage of revenue, and said they'd have to raise prices 17% to match the 17% they spend now on labor. That's not a study. At least there should be references to his source material. How does he know labor is 17%? Is that corporate labor only? Or does it include franchisees? HuffPo is making a claim, calling it science, and not backing it up.

All of the methodology is found within that article, and the annual report is online.

http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/conte...rs/Investor 2013/2012 Annual Report Final.pdf

If you scroll down to page 28, you can find that their payroll and benefits amounted to 4.71 billion that year, and their revenue 27.567 billion that year, which indeed works out to 17.1%. Of course, to assume that a company can just hike their prices almost 20% and not lose customers to competitors is pretty ridiculous.

 

[Nintendesert]

The obvious solution is for the States to pay a livable wage stipend to each worker to make up for McDonald's low pay. It would be tied to unemployment or Obamacare or something. Keep the value menu at a dollar and just raise everyone's taxes so the pain is hidden down the road. Problem solved!

 

[silverpig]

Let's say you live in SC, have no debt, on $160K.......

Then you've got a nice income. I was refuting that point that it's a lot of money anywhere. It isn't. I provided a counterexample.

 

[Craig234]

I may be ignorant on the issue; but I did not see you answer the question either.

Yup, because you need to go get more information than a post. But the single largest policy change that helped was the right to collective bargaining, which led to other changes.

 

[silverpig]

All of the methodology is found within that article, and the annual report is online.

http://www.aboutmcdonalds.com/conte...rs/Investor 2013/2012 Annual Report Final.pdf

If you scroll down to page 28, you can find that their payroll and benefits amounted to 4.71 billion that year, and their revenue 27.567 billion that year, which indeed works out to 17.1%. Of course, to assume that a company can just hike their prices almost 20% and not lose customers to competitors is pretty ridiculous.

No, the kid fucked up.

$27.5B is total revenues, which includes $18.6B in company-operated sales (ie, big macs), and $8.9B in franchised revenues (ie, franchising fees).

The payroll and benefits of $4.7B is on the company operated restaurant expenses, so the proper ratio would be 4.7/18.6 = 25.2%

The franchised restaurants would probably have a similar labour cost ratio. Actually, it'd be a little higher as they have the added franchise fee cost to bear.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Say you have medical bills, and you and your wife both just finished professional degrees (say law, or business school), and have student loans from grad + undergrad. You both have jobs in Manhattan. You could easily be on a KD diet.

That's an oddly specific scenario, but let's roll with it. Apart from medical expenses (which can happen to anyone regardless of income), you're talking about personal decisions that cost more money; specifically, taking on debt to pursue degrees and choosing to live near Manhattan. And guess what? There are literally millions of people in New York City alone who manage to get by on less than $160,000 in annual income. Hell, some of them even have medical bills, and those are a lot harder to pay off if you're making $20k as opposed to $160k.

I can understand someone who doesn't feel "rich" with $160k in income; that's not an exorbitant, "guess I'll buy a yacht just to watch it sink" level of money that we associate with uber-wealth. But anyone who complains about feeling "poor" because they made decisions that cost more per week than most of America earns in a month is a fucking imbecile. "Jesus, this money really doesn't feel like a lot after I spend it." Well no shit.

 

[T9D]

All you people supporting this won't give a damn cent extra to these people after they get their food their now. If you have a problem with the wage all you have to do is hand them an extra five or something when you are in there. But you never will.

The higher wages just screws the other people who now have to pay higher food costs. Minimum wage is just right and fair for what they do. I worked minimum wage. It's not for living your whole life off of. It's to get you started on another path eventually. If you don't bother to set off on another path then don't complain. Make it work. You agreed to that wage when you started

 

[SSSnail]

All you people supporting this won't give a damn cent extra to these people after they get their food their now. If you have a problem with the wage all you have to do is hand them an extra five or something when you are in there. But you never will.

The higher wages just screws the other people who now have to pay higher food costs. Minimum wage is just right and fair for what they do. I worked minimum wage. It's not for living your whole life off of. It's to get you started on another path eventually. If you don't bother to set off on another path then don't complain. Make it work. You agreed to that wage when you started

But that's just it, it's important to scream on forums to appear noble. I highly doubt people like craig234 has given any of their personal wealth to anyone they feel ”deserve” of a higher pay. Nor have they create wealth themselves that are beneficial to society. But, they'll be the loudest advocating for others to give up their earned wealth.

 

[silverpig]

That's an oddly specific scenario, but let's roll with it. Apart from medical expenses (which can happen to anyone regardless of income), you're talking about personal decisions that cost more money; specifically, taking on debt to pursue degrees and choosing to live near Manhattan. And guess what? There are literally millions of people in New York City alone who manage to get by on less than $160,000 in annual income. Hell, some of them even have medical bills, and those are a lot harder to pay off if you're making $20k as opposed to $160k.

I can understand someone who doesn't feel "rich" with $160k in income; that's not an exorbitant, "guess I'll buy a yacht just to watch it sink" level of money that we associate with uber-wealth. But anyone who complains about feeling "poor" because they made decisions that cost more per week than most of America earns in a month is a fucking imbecile. "Jesus, this money really doesn't feel like a lot after I spend it." Well no shit.

Read the context. No one complained about being "poor".

One poster said he and his wife combined to make $160k/yr, but they didn't feel secure enough to have kids yet
Another poster said he was obviously wasting money and would be raising spoiled brats
Other posters said that $160k/yr is tons of money no matter where in the country you are

I was refuting that, saying there may be plenty of situations where that might not be true. I provided one specific, plausible example where $160k may not be enough for a couple to consider themselves stable enough to raise a family.

 

[highland145]

Then you've got a nice income. I was refuting that point that it's a lot of money anywhere. It isn't. I provided a counterexample.

True.

 

[Rakehellion]

Wrong. They're not taking the time or the effort to earn that.

Not everyone can afford or finish school or find a job at a big office like your privileged ass.

 

[Rakehellion]

What makes someone *entitled* to live in New York City 'proper'?

Maybe they were fucking born there, you twat.

No one's entitled to anything, and McDonald's certainly isn't entitled to underpay their workers.

 

[Ksyder]

160k is roughly 3k a week. I'm not going to say that a person is wrong if they don't feel that they can afford kids on that salary.

But clearly they must have some serious obligations that aren't required. Like several expensive car payments, student loans, smartphone plans, cable bills, probably live in a nice house, etc. If they wanted to have kids they could scale back expenses if necessary. Must be the student loans that are the holdup.

 

[highland145]

Maybe they were fucking born there, you twat.

No one's entitled to anything, and McDonald's certainly isn't entitled to underpay their workers.

Look, you twat, McD is paying what the fed says. So piss up a rope and bitch to your president.

 

[Ksyder]

McDonalds will pay what the job is worth, period. If you have no education and no skills then you don't make much. Simple as that.

$15/hr is laughable unless you are supervisor or manager. Its just the free market at work.

However, I would add that paying a bit more wouldn't hurt, if it would mean that they would have commited workers that don't fuck around all the time like alot of people I've seen at fast food places. Mostly you see hs and college students working there. The people striking may be damn good at their job and are committed. But should they get more money? I guess McD's should decide.

 

[highland145]

160k is roughly 3k a week. I'm not going to say that a person is wrong if they don't feel that they can afford kids on that salary.

But clearly they must have some serious obligations that aren't required. Like several expensive car payments, student loans, smartphone plans, cable bills, probably live in a nice house, etc. If they wanted to have kids they could scale back expenses if necessary. Must be the student loans that are the holdup.

Feeling the need for more $$ in the bank is the hold up. Prior to 2006, I never made more than $50K/yr and I paid the cost for our son to be born because of no maternity insurance.

 

[Rakehellion]

Look, you twat, McD is paying what the fed says. So piss up a rope and bitch to your president.

The Federal government has nothing to do with this. They're attacking at the source.

 

[Ksyder]

Feeling the need for more $$ in the bank is the hold up. Prior to 2006, I never made more than $50K/yr and I paid the cost for our son to be born because of no maternity insurance.

I was making generalizations so not judging you directly. Needing to save more money certainly makes sense.

 

[Mixolydian]

This thread is going well...

 

[BoberFett]

No, the kid fucked up.

$27.5B is total revenues, which includes $18.6B in company-operated sales (ie, big macs), and $8.9B in franchised revenues (ie, franchising fees).

The payroll and benefits of $4.7B is on the company operated restaurant expenses, so the proper ratio would be 4.7/18.6 = 25.2%

The franchised restaurants would probably have a similar labour cost ratio. Actually, it'd be a little higher as they have the added franchise fee cost to bear.

Yep, that was my initial assumption as well, borne out by proper research from somebody other than some stupid college student who thinks they understand everything.

We should also keep in mind that's worldwide revenue. The 25% you calculated above is a worldwide average. Their US revenues for company owned stores is only about 25% of their worldwide corporate owned business. Without digging deeper, it's hard to say what percentage of revenue is labor per region. It could be higher or lower than that.

 

[highland145]

The Federal government has nothing to do with this. They're attacking at the source.

Glad to know McDs sets minimum wages.

Cutting my employees asap. I pay them too much.

 

[highland145]

I was making generalizations so not judging you directly. Needing to save more money certainly makes sense.

No offense taken. Just pointing out peoples priorities might be skewed.

 

[Rakehellion]

Glad to know McDs sets minimum wages.

Cutting my employees asap. I pay them too much.

McDonald's set the wages for McDonald's employees. And no, they don't get a pat on the back for doing the bare minimum required by law.

 

[highland145]

This thread is going well...

I think so. How's the wine?